Merger-plank-breen
mergeer ahead? :Source: http://progresspittsburgh.net/?p=71 an article in the post-gazette last week announced the creation of a panel to study the possibility of city-county merger, among other means of increasing the efficiency of government in pittsburgh and allegheny county. conversations about city-county merger have a long history in pittsburgh, ever since the city tried unsuccessfully to annex the county in 1906. suburban residents typically resist efforts to create a unified regional government which is why mergers, which must be passed by referendum, often fail. despite this, there are advantages to regional government this case the county is the region in question. at the most conceptual level, regional government requires a comprehensive view and thereby encourages policies that serve the good of the whole. in allegheny county today there are 130 seperate municipalities; this means 130 cities, townships, and boroughs. the reality of this is that people tend to self-segregate into these municipalities based on qualities like economic status and race. the benefit of regional government is that it takes all of these different areas under one umbrella and can mitigate this compartmentalization with policies that promote equity and therefore quality of life for the entire region. Make Up of Committee while my academic enthusiasm for regional policy abounds, i have some skepticism about this particular scenario. first, i am discouraged by the make-up of the new ‘Committee to Enhance Efficiency and Effectiveness of County and City Government,’ whose knowledge about governance issues is not apparent. Missing the Rest secondly, we should note the subleties of what this panel is to study: how the city of pittsburgh’s government and allegheny county’s government can be more efficient, presumably through some sort of cooperation or consolidation. what is missing from the discussion is what the other 129 municipalities in the county have to do with this exploration, which is nothing. this conversation is about whether, and to what degree, the city of pittsburgh’s government should be absorbed into allegheny county’s government. however, it would be the only one and all the other municipalities in the county would continue right on with their business. how would this scenario play out to benefit the parties involved? Fails city-county merger has the ability to save money, but 'it fails to address the issues that regional strategies in land use planning and revenue sharing are able to. while pittsburgh and allegheny county might share a government, the other 129 municipalities will retain control of their local zoning boards and tax collection. to be fair, there is a county department of economic development and allegheny county has completed a comprehensive plan, both of which are positive steps. however, a less comprehensive approach to regional government means less opportunties for the region, as a whole, to grow and see improved quality of life. Forget Power Talk finally, my last concern with this potential merger is the lack of discussion about forms of regional government and the consolidation of power that would occur under the form in question. i may be jaded, but i have touble believing that a certain county executive wants efficient government more than he wants control of the city AND the county governments. what better stepping stone is there to running the state than reining over the heart and soul of southwestern pennsylvania? there’s also something convenient about a mayor, who is less likely to be ‘re-elected’ than not, and a county executive, who wants to be governor, that grew up together on the northside in a scheme where the county consumes the city. this is a mediocre solution that panders to municipalities that feel their power threatened by discussions of real regionalism, sacrifices the city of pittsburgh’s government for cost savings and doesn’t provide any significant promise for improved quality of life in the region. what i want to see happen is what’s best for the city of pittsburgh. that could be a city-county consolidation but i don’t want to see the people of the city of pittsburgh fed the idea as a forgone conclusion. we should have a discussion about what is the best form of regional government, if any, for pittsburgh. it is our responsibility as citizens to be informed and outspoken. Responses Vanna on: October 24, 2006 Hard to imagine how a committee named Committee to Enhance Efficiency and Effectiveness of County and City Government can do anything efficiently. rich10e on October 24, 2006 there does seem to be a rush to implement a city/county merger..and as stated, the motivation of the players must certainly be considered ... in a county with numerous distressed communities and many more on the verge, it seems to me that there are better candidates available for consideration, smaller municipalities that would make good templates for merging larger ones. Of course having the cooperation of the two chief executives certainly doesn’t hurt. In 1994 Former County Controller Frank Lucchino suggested voluntary disincorporation as a tool to salvage disterssed communities. There were no takers. About the same time a professor from Pitt, whose name escapes me, suggested a unified Allegheny County school district. This was met with silence. There are currently 8 COG’s, councils of government, where municipalities can share services and purchasing without the need for merging. Pittsburgh does not belong to any of them. A merged city/county based on Allegheny County being the dominant partner would be the 28th largest county in the US. A mergerd city/county with the brand name Pittsburgh would be the 7th largest city in the US. Marketting “Allegheny County” nationally would be a nightmare; marketting a larger and improved “Pittsburgh” would be PR firms dream come true. As Breen states,the final decision belongs to the people of Pittsburgh. joshua on October 24, 2006 There was one taker on the voluntary disincorporation idea. Russ Hardiman of Kilbuck, http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04116/305574.stm, wanted to dissolve his tiny little slice of Allegheny Co., but has been stymied. The problem emerges when everyone wants their neighbors tax base, but doesn’t want to assume their expenditures. The size of Pittsburgh/Allegheny Co. is irrelevant at the end of the day as residents are usually most concerned with getting the best possible services at the lowest possible price. Most studies on the issue assume that a newly merged entity would be able to negotiate the lowest possible price for labor & materials but it often works the other way. This is especially the case with harmonizing labor contracts. Toronto has had their payroll/expenses rise since amalgamation in 1998, http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04264/382276.stm. At the end of the day, Mr. Onorato’s plans have no legs. Patrick on October 24, 2006 I don’t know if it is a rush to actually merge anything, or a rush to appear to be talking about mergers or consolidations. It is always good politics for a city politician to favor cost sharing and consolidation because the city has the most to gain. The devil is always in the details. If the county government is to assume responsibilities that the city government currently pays for itself, then Onorato and county council must find the money somewhere - that could be a huge cost savings for the city to shed some expensive tasks or departments (major crimes, parks, public works/paving, etc.), particularly in areas where the county is already providing similar services to suburban municipalities. But county taxes will have to go up to pay for all those new tasks, and 11 out of 15 county council members hail from the suburbs. Such a transfer of responsibility seems unlikely, especially if a future candidate for governor is in the chief executive’s office. BTW, you have to love the enhanced reputation and influence of the North Catholic Alumni Association - those Central Catholic Vikings must be getting jealous! Linnks * Merger